Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 104943 

recordkeeping and reporting 

requirements of the original 2018 

submission. Finally, the changes to the 

CSAPR reference are to ensure that the 

State is using a term that will be an 

applicable reference in the State’s SIP if 

the EPA is to update the rule in the 

future. 

The June 10, 2024 Maryland SIP 

submittal does not result in increased 

NOX emissions, and therefore has no 

impact on any requirements related to 

attainment, reasonable further progress, 

or any other NAAQS requirements 

under the CAA. The submittal therefore 

meets section 110(l) of the CAA. 

III. Proposed Action 

EPA’s review of this material 

indicates that Maryland’s June 10, 2024 

SIP revision submittal (Maryland SIP 

Revision #24–01) is approvable in 

accordance with CAA section 110. EPA 

is proposing to approve the Maryland 

SIP revision that reallocates the NOX

ozone season emission cap from Luke 

Paper Mill to the new source set-aside 

and updates its regulatory crossreference of the Federal ozone season 

trading programs to automatically 

incorporate by reference any future 

changes to those programs EPA is 

soliciting public comments on the 

issues discussed in this document. 

These comments will be considered 

before taking final action. 

IV. Incorporation by Reference 

In this document, EPA is proposing to 

include in a final EPA rule regulatory 

text that includes incorporation by 

reference. In accordance with 

requirements of 1 CFR 51.5, EPA is 

proposing to incorporate by reference 

the revised Maryland regulation 

COMAR 26.11.40.02 and the revised 

COMAR 26.11.40.03, as described in 

section II of this preamble. EPA has 

made, and will continue to make, these 

materials generally available through 

www.regulations.gov and at the EPA 

Region III Office (please contact the 

person identified in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

preamble for more information). 

V. Statutory and Executive Order 

Reviews 

Under the CAA, the Administrator is 

required to approve a SIP submission 

that complies with the provisions of the 

CAA and applicable Federal regulations. 

42 U.S.C. 7410(k); 40 CFR 52.02(a). 

Thus, in reviewing SIP submissions, 

EPA’s role is to approve State choices, 

provided that they meet the criteria of 

the CAA. Accordingly, this action 

merely approves State law as meeting 

Federal requirements and does not 

impose additional requirements beyond 

those imposed by State law. For that 

reason, this proposed action: 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to review by the Office of 

Management and Budget under 

Executive Orders 12866 (58 FR 51735, 

October 4, 1993) and 13563 (76 FR 3821, 

January 21, 2011); 

• Does not impose an information 

collection burden under the provisions 

of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 

U.S.C. 3501 et seq.); 

• Is certified as not having a 

significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities 

under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 

U.S.C. 601 et seq.); 

• Does not contain any unfunded 

mandate or significantly or uniquely 

affect small governments, as described 

in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995 (Pub. L. 104–4); 

• Does not have federalism 

implications as specified in Executive 

Order 13132 (64 FR 43255, August 10, 

1999); 

• Is not an economically significant 

regulatory action based on health or 

safety risks subject to Executive Order 

13045 (62 FR 19885, April 23, 1997); 

• Is not a significant regulatory action 

subject to Executive Order 13211 (66 FR 

28355, May 22, 2001); and 

• Is not subject to requirements of 

Section 12(d) of the National 

Technology Transfer and Advancement 

Act of 1995 (15 U.S.C. 272 note) because 

application of those requirements would 

be inconsistent with the Clean Air Act; 

Executive Order 12898 (Federal 

Actions to Address Environmental 

Justice in Minority Populations and 

Low-Income Populations, 59 FR 7629, 

February 16, 1994) directs Federal 

agencies to identify and address 

‘‘disproportionately high and adverse 

human health or environmental effects’’ 

of their actions on minority populations 

and low-income populations to the 

greatest extent practicable and 

permitted by law. EPA defines 

environmental justice (EJ) as ‘‘the fair 

treatment and meaningful involvement 

of all people regardless of race, color, 

national origin, or income with respect 

to the development, implementation, 

and enforcement of environmental laws, 

regulations, and policies.’’ EPA further 

defines the term fair treatment to mean 

that ‘‘no group of people should bear a 

disproportionate burden of 

environmental harms and risks, 

including those resulting from the 

negative environmental consequences of 

industrial, governmental, and 

commercial operations or programs and 

policies.’’ 

The air agency did not evaluate 

environmental justice considerations as 

part of its SIP submittal; the CAA and 

applicable implementing regulations 

neither prohibit nor require such an 

evaluation. EPA did not perform an EJ 

analysis and did not consider EJ in this 

action. Consideration of EJ is not 

required as part of this action, and there 

is no information in the record 

inconsistent with the stated goal of E.O. 

12898 of achieving environmental 

justice for people of color, low-income 

populations, and Indigenous peoples. 

In addition, this proposed 

rulemaking, that amends Maryland’s 

NOX Ozone Season Emissions Caps for 

Non-Trading Large NOX Units, does not 

have Tribal implications as specified by 

Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, 

November 9, 2000), because the SIP is 

not approved to apply in Indian country 

located in the State, and EPA notes that 

it will not impose substantial direct 

costs on Tribal governments or preempt 

Tribal law. 

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52 

Environmental protection, Air 

pollution control, Incorporation by 

reference, Nitrogen dioxide, Ozone, 

Reporting and recordkeeping 

requirements. 

Catherine A. Libertz, 

Acting Regional Administrator, Region III. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30534 Filed 12–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0417; FRL–12279– 

03–R9] 

Air Plan Conditional Approval; 

California; Bay Area Air Quality 

Management District; Extension of 

Comment Period 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule; extension of 

comment period. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is extending the comment 

period for a proposed rule published 

November 29, 2024, and corrected on 

December 11, 2024. The corrected 

comment period end date for the 

proposed rule was December 30, 2024. 

In response to commenter request, the 

EPA is now extending the comment 

period for the proposed rule to January 

29, 2025. 

DATES: The comment period for the 

proposed rule published on November 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1
104944 Federal Register / Vol. 89, No. 247 / Thursday, December 26, 2024 / Proposed Rules 

29, 2024, at 89 FR 94633, and corrected 

on December 11, 2024 (89 FR 99790), is 

extended. Comments must be received 

on or before January 29, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2024–0417 at https://

www.regulations.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. If you need 

assistance in a language other than 

English or if you are a person with a 

disability who needs a reasonable 

accommodation at no cost to you, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

Allison Kawasaki, EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 

94105; phone: (415) 972–3922; email: 

kawasaki.allison@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On 

November 29, 2024 (89 FR 94633), the 

EPA published the proposed rule ‘‘Air 

Plan Conditional Approval; California; 

Bay Area Air Quality Management 

District’’ in the Federal Register. The 

comment period end date for the 

proposed rule, as published, was 

December 30, 2025, which established a 

395-day comment period. A correction 

was published on December 11, 2024 

(89 FR 99790), that corrected the 

comment period end date in the 

proposed rule to December 30, 2024, 

which corresponds to a 30-day public 

comment period from the original 

publication date of November 29, 2024. 

In response to commenter request, the 

EPA is now extending the comment 

period for the proposed rule to January 

29, 2025. Comments must be received 

on or before January 29, 2025. 

Dated: December 16, 2024. 

Matthew Lakin, 

Director, Air and Radiation Division, Region 

IX. 

[FR Doc. 2024–30464 Filed 12–23–24; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6560–50–P 

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION 

AGENCY 

40 CFR Part 52 

[EPA–R09–OAR–2024–0563; FRL–12442– 

01–R9] 

Air Plan Approval; California; Mojave 

Desert Air Quality Management 

District; Oxides of Nitrogen 

AGENCY: Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA). 

ACTION: Proposed rule. 

SUMMARY: The Environmental Protection 

Agency (EPA) is proposing to approve a 

revision to the Mojave Desert Air 

Quality Management District 

(MDAQMD) portion of the California 

State Implementation Plan (SIP). This 

revision concerns emissions of oxides of 

nitrogen (NOX) from industrial, 

institutional, and commercial boilers, 

steam generators, and process heaters. 

We are proposing to approve a local rule 

to regulate these emission sources under 

the Clean Air Act (CAA or the Act). We 

are taking comments on this proposal 

and plan to follow with a final action. 

DATES: Comments must be received on 

or before January 27, 2025. 

ADDRESSES: Submit your comments, 

identified by Docket ID No. EPA–R09– 

OAR–2024–0563 at https://

www.regulations.gov. For comments 

submitted at Regulations.gov, follow the 

online instructions for submitting 

comments. Once submitted, comments 

cannot be edited or removed from 

Regulations.gov. The EPA may publish 

any comment received to its public 

docket. Do not submit electronically any 

information you consider to be 

Confidential Business Information (CBI) 

or other information whose disclosure is 

restricted by statute. Multimedia 

submissions (audio, video, etc.) must be 

accompanied by a written comment. 

The written comment is considered the 

official comment and should include 

discussion of all points you wish to 

make. The EPA will generally not 

consider comments or comment 

contents located outside of the primary 

submission (i.e., on the web, cloud, or 

other file sharing system). For 

additional submission methods, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

For the full EPA public comment policy, 

information about CBI or multimedia 

submissions, and general guidance on 

making effective comments, please visit 

https://www.epa.gov/dockets/ 

commenting-epa-dockets. If you need 

assistance in a language other than 

English or if you are a person with a 

disability who needs a reasonable 

accommodation at no cost to you, please 

contact the person identified in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: La 

Kenya Evans-Hopper, EPA Region IX, 75 

Hawthorne St., San Francisco, CA 

94105; phone: (415) 972–3245; email: 

evanshopper.lakenya@epa.gov. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Throughout this document, ‘‘we,’’ ‘‘us,’’ 

and ‘‘our’’ refer to the EPA. 

Table of Contents 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

B. Are there other versions of this rule? 

C. What is the purpose of the submitted 

rule revision? 

II. The EPA’s Evaluation and Action 

A. How is the EPA evaluating the rule? 

B. Does the rule meet the evaluation 

criteria? 

C. Proposed Action and Public Comment 

III. Incorporation by Reference 

IV. Statutory and Executive Order Reviews 

I. The State’s Submittal 

A. What rule did the State submit? 

Table 1 lists the rule addressed by this 

proposal with the dates that it was 

adopted by the local air agency and 

submitted by the California Air 

Resources Control Board (CARB). 

TABLE 1—SUBMITTED RULE

Local Agency Rule No. Rule title Amended Submitted 

MDAQMD ............................... 1157 Boilers and Process Heaters .................................................. 09/25/23 01/10/24 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PROPOSALS1